Difference between revisions of "Korach's Rebellion/2"
m |
m |
||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
<point><b>Who were the 250 men?</b> This position might suggest that the 250 men comprised any of the following:<br/> | <point><b>Who were the 250 men?</b> This position might suggest that the 250 men comprised any of the following:<br/> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
− | <li><b>Levites </b>– <multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">R. Chananel</a><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> maintains that the 250 people were all from the tribe of Levi.<fn>See below that this is supported by | + | <li><b>Levites </b>– <multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">R. Chananel</a><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> maintains that the 250 people were all from the tribe of Levi.<fn>See below that this is supported by the fact that Moshe addresses the Levites directly, telling them "רַב לָכֶם בְּנֵי לֵוִי"  and "שִׁמְעוּ נָא בְּנֵי לֵוִי".</fn>  They, like Korach, were not satisfied with "serving the priests" and aspired to be priests themselves.</li> |
<li><b>Reubenites</b> – According to Rashi, the men were mainly from the tribe of Reuven. Rashi suggests that their joining the rebellion was a technical result of their living close to and being swayed by Korach, but it is possible that the tribe as a whole felt that they deserved priestly status due to their ancestor's being the firstborn to Yaakov (see R"Y Bekhor Shor above).</li> | <li><b>Reubenites</b> – According to Rashi, the men were mainly from the tribe of Reuven. Rashi suggests that their joining the rebellion was a technical result of their living close to and being swayed by Korach, but it is possible that the tribe as a whole felt that they deserved priestly status due to their ancestor's being the firstborn to Yaakov (see R"Y Bekhor Shor above).</li> | ||
− | <li><b>All of Israel</b> – Alternatively, it is possible that this group was comprised of people from all the tribes.  This position might maintain that before the sin of the Calf and the building of the Tabernacle, every individual Israelite had been allowed to sacrifice on private altars, and the people were hoping to return to this status quo.<fn>See Ramban's <multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">addition</a><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> to his commentary at the end of | + | <li><b>All of Israel</b> – Alternatively, it is possible that this group was comprised of people from all the tribes.  This position might maintain that before the sin of the Calf and the building of the Tabernacle, every individual Israelite had been allowed to sacrifice on private altars, and the people were hoping to return to this status quo.<fn>See Ramban's <multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">addition</a><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> to his commentary at the end of Bemidbar 16:21 and Hoil Moshe, both discussed below.</fn></li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>"רַב לָכֶם בְּנֵי לֵוִי"</b> – According to R. Chananel, Moshe's singling out of the Levites is logical; he mentions them since most of the rebels were from that tribe. The other sources might suggest that Moshe specifies the Levites, not because they were the majority, but because their complaint was the most troubling, given their already exalted status.</point> | <point><b>"רַב לָכֶם בְּנֵי לֵוִי"</b> – According to R. Chananel, Moshe's singling out of the Levites is logical; he mentions them since most of the rebels were from that tribe. The other sources might suggest that Moshe specifies the Levites, not because they were the majority, but because their complaint was the most troubling, given their already exalted status.</point> | ||
Line 41: | Line 41: | ||
Against Aharon and Moshe | Against Aharon and Moshe | ||
<p>The rebellion had two focal points.  Korach and his 250 followers objected to Aharon's priesthood, while Datan and Aviram challenged Moshe's leadership.</p> | <p>The rebellion had two focal points.  Korach and his 250 followers objected to Aharon's priesthood, while Datan and Aviram challenged Moshe's leadership.</p> | ||
− | <mekorot><multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="RambanBemidbar17-62025" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 17:6, 20, 25</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> #2,<fn>This is how Ramban interprets the chapter "על דרך הפשט".  See | + | <mekorot><multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="RambanBemidbar17-62025" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 17:6, 20, 25</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> #2,<fn>This is how Ramban interprets the chapter "על דרך הפשט".  See his additional comments at the end of his <a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">commentary on Bemidbar 16:21</a>. [For more about Ramban's additions to his commentary, see <a href="Commentators:Ramban's Updates" data-aht="page">Ramban's Updates</a>].  Most of Ramban's commentary on the chapter, though, is "על דרך רבותנו", who assume that the firstborns were originally involved in sacrificial service.  See Ramban in the third position, below.</fn> <multilink><a href="RSRHirschBemidbar16" data-aht="source">R. S.R. Hirsch</a><a href="RSRHirschBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="RSRHirschBemidbar17-6-18" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 17:6:18</a><a href="RSRHirschBemidbar17-6-28" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 17:6-28</a><a href="R. Samson Raphael Hirsch" data-aht="parshan">About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch</a></multilink>, contemporary scholars<fn>See, for instance, R"T Granot, "<a href="https://www.etzion.org.il/he/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A9%D7%AA-%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%97-%D7%A4%D7%95%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%98%D7%99%D7%A7%D7%94-%D7%95%D7%90%D7%99%D7%93%D7%99%D7%90%D7%95%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%92%D7%99%D7%94-%D7%91%D7%9E%D7%A8%D7%93-%D7%93%D7%AA%D7%9F-%D7%95%D7%90%D7%91%D7%99%D7%A8%D7%9D">פוליטיקה ואידיאולוגיה במרד דתן ואבירם</a>", R"M Leibtag, "<a href="https://www.etzion.org.il/he/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A9%D7%AA-%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%97-%D7%94%D7%AA%D7%99%D7%90%D7%95%D7%A8-%D7%94%D7%97%D7%A1%D7%A8-%D7%91%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A9%D7%AA-%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%97">התיאור החסר בפרשת קורח</a>", R"E Samet, "<a href="https://www.etzion.org.il/he/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A9%D7%AA-%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%97-%D7%9E%D7%A9%D7%94-%D7%90%D7%9C-%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%9C-%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%93%D7%99%D7%9D-%D7%9E%D7%A0%D7%94%D7%99%D7%92%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%91%D7%9E%D7%91%D7%97%D7%9F-%D7%94%D7%94%D7%AA%D7%A0%D7%92%D7%93%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%91%D7%A9%D7%AA%D7%99-%D7%97%D7%96%D7%99%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%AA">משה אל מול המורדים: מנהיגות במבחן ההתנגדות בשתי חזיתות</a>", and R"A Bazak, "<a href="https://www.etzion.org.il/he/%D7%90%D7%AA-%D7%9E%D7%99-%D7%9C%D7%A7%D7%97-%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%97" data-aht="page">את מי לקח קורח</a>".</fn></mekorot> |
<point><b>Two groups</b> – Several factors might support the idea that the rebellion was in essence a double revolt, led by two distinct parties with disparate goals:<br/> | <point><b>Two groups</b> – Several factors might support the idea that the rebellion was in essence a double revolt, led by two distinct parties with disparate goals:<br/> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
<li><b>Two attitudes to Moshe</b> – While Korach and the 250 princes recognize Moshe's authority and heed his words, Datan and Aviram do not.<fn>This, in turn, leads to two very different reactions on the part of Moshe. He responds only to Datan and Aviram with anger.</fn></li> | <li><b>Two attitudes to Moshe</b> – While Korach and the 250 princes recognize Moshe's authority and heed his words, Datan and Aviram do not.<fn>This, in turn, leads to two very different reactions on the part of Moshe. He responds only to Datan and Aviram with anger.</fn></li> | ||
<li><b>Two locales</b> – Physically, the two groups are located in different places. The fact that Moshe must send for Datan and Aviram (v. 12) implies that they were separate from the other rebels.<fn>It is not clear if the two groups were always separate, or if Datan and Aviram were present when Korach's group made their arguments, and only left afterwards.</fn></li> | <li><b>Two locales</b> – Physically, the two groups are located in different places. The fact that Moshe must send for Datan and Aviram (v. 12) implies that they were separate from the other rebels.<fn>It is not clear if the two groups were always separate, or if Datan and Aviram were present when Korach's group made their arguments, and only left afterwards.</fn></li> | ||
− | <li><b>Two tests / punishments</b> – The two groups are proven wrong and meet their deaths in different ways.  While the 250 princes are burned by Divine fire, Datan and Aviram are swallowed by the earth. | + | <li><b>Two tests / punishments</b> – The two groups are proven wrong and meet their deaths in different ways.  While the 250 princes are burned by Divine fire, Datan and Aviram are swallowed by the earth.</li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>When did the rebellion take place?</b> Ramban asserts that the story is in its chronological place and follows the decree of death in the wilderness after the sin of the Spies. It is this which prompted Datan and Aviram's complaint against Moshe's leadership.<fn>Their complaint that Moshe is not taking them to the Promised Land, but to die in the wilderness ("לַהֲמִיתֵנוּ בַּמִּדְבָּר") is a direct allusion to the decree.</fn> In addition, though Korach's grievance against Aharon's appointment preceded the decree, it was only now that he felt he could act upon it. Beforehand no one would have dared rebel against Moshe, whom they viewed as their redeemer. The decree, though, embittered the nation, making the time ripe for Korach's incitement.<fn>Cf. <multilink><a href="ShadalBemidbar16-1" data-aht="source">Shadal Bemidbar 16:1</a><a href="ShadalBemidbar16-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16:1</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>.</fn></point> | <point><b>When did the rebellion take place?</b> Ramban asserts that the story is in its chronological place and follows the decree of death in the wilderness after the sin of the Spies. It is this which prompted Datan and Aviram's complaint against Moshe's leadership.<fn>Their complaint that Moshe is not taking them to the Promised Land, but to die in the wilderness ("לַהֲמִיתֵנוּ בַּמִּדְבָּר") is a direct allusion to the decree.</fn> In addition, though Korach's grievance against Aharon's appointment preceded the decree, it was only now that he felt he could act upon it. Beforehand no one would have dared rebel against Moshe, whom they viewed as their redeemer. The decree, though, embittered the nation, making the time ripe for Korach's incitement.<fn>Cf. <multilink><a href="ShadalBemidbar16-1" data-aht="source">Shadal Bemidbar 16:1</a><a href="ShadalBemidbar16-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16:1</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>.</fn></point> | ||
Line 69: | Line 69: | ||
<li><b>Challenging Aharon and the priesthood</b> – Most of these sources assume that Korach was jealous of and desired Aharon's position. Ibn Ezra adds that the Levites as a whole might have resented having to serve the priests. According to Netziv and Hoil Moshe, in contrast, it was the lay Israelites who wished to be priests.<fn>See discussion below about the identity of the 250 men.</fn></li> | <li><b>Challenging Aharon and the priesthood</b> – Most of these sources assume that Korach was jealous of and desired Aharon's position. Ibn Ezra adds that the Levites as a whole might have resented having to serve the priests. According to Netziv and Hoil Moshe, in contrast, it was the lay Israelites who wished to be priests.<fn>See discussion below about the identity of the 250 men.</fn></li> | ||
<li><b>Protesting the selection of the Levites</b> – Ibn Ezra, Ramban, Chizkuni and Abarbanel present this complaint as emanating mainly from the firstborns<fn>Ibn Ezra claims that Korach, too, was a firstborn and, incensed by the switch, spearheaded the rebellion.</fn> who had originally played a role in the cultic service<fn>In this they follow <multilink><a href="BavliZevachim112b" data-aht="source">Bavli Zevachim</a><a href="BavliZevachim112b" data-aht="source">Zevachim 112b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>.  It seems that though these sources speak of resentment against the Levites, what the firstborns really wanted was not just the secondary position of "serving the priests" but also to resume their original positions as active priests.</fn> but were then displaced by the Levites,<fn>For elaboration, see <a href="Selection of the Priests and Levites" data-aht="page">Selection of the Priests and Levites</a>.</fn> while the Netziv and Hoil Moshe, in contrast, claim that the Israelites at large were bothered by the monopoly of the tribe.</li> | <li><b>Protesting the selection of the Levites</b> – Ibn Ezra, Ramban, Chizkuni and Abarbanel present this complaint as emanating mainly from the firstborns<fn>Ibn Ezra claims that Korach, too, was a firstborn and, incensed by the switch, spearheaded the rebellion.</fn> who had originally played a role in the cultic service<fn>In this they follow <multilink><a href="BavliZevachim112b" data-aht="source">Bavli Zevachim</a><a href="BavliZevachim112b" data-aht="source">Zevachim 112b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>.  It seems that though these sources speak of resentment against the Levites, what the firstborns really wanted was not just the secondary position of "serving the priests" but also to resume their original positions as active priests.</fn> but were then displaced by the Levites,<fn>For elaboration, see <a href="Selection of the Priests and Levites" data-aht="page">Selection of the Priests and Levites</a>.</fn> while the Netziv and Hoil Moshe, in contrast, claim that the Israelites at large were bothered by the monopoly of the tribe.</li> | ||
− | <li><b>Challenging Moshe</b> - According to Ramban and Hoil Moshe, Datan and Aviram challenged Moshe's overall leadership, blaming him for taking them to die in the Wilderness.<fn>According to both Ramban and Hoil Moshe, this complaint was not aired during the original discussion in verses 3-11.</fn> According to Ibn Ezra and Abarbanel, in contrast, they<fn>See note below, that according to Abarbanel, there was an entire contingent of Reubenites, in addition to Datan and Aviram.</fn> were upset about their tribe losing its firstborn status to Yosef as regards inheritance, and to Yehuda as regards leadership.<fn>As Moshe would seem not to be responsible for either of these, this approach must explain why the rebels would blame him.  Abarbanel implies that these points were emphasized during the division of the camp, when Yosef clearly received two portions (Ephraim and Menashe each had their own encampment) and Yehuda was chosen to travel first. This might have led the people to believe that Moshe was involved in the decision. Ibn Ezra adds that maybe they suspected Moshe of favoritism, as his loyal servant, Yehoshua, was also from the tribe of Yosef</fn></li> | + | <li><b>Challenging Moshe</b> - According to Ramban and Hoil Moshe, Datan and Aviram challenged Moshe's overall leadership, blaming him for taking them to die in the Wilderness.<fn>According to both Ramban and Hoil Moshe, this complaint was not aired during the original discussion in verses 3-11.</fn> According to Ibn Ezra and Abarbanel, in contrast, they<fn>See note below, that according to Abarbanel, there was an entire contingent of Reubenites, in addition to Datan and Aviram.</fn> were upset about their tribe losing its firstborn status to Yosef as regards inheritance, and to Yehuda as regards leadership.<fn>As Moshe would seem not to be responsible for either of these, this approach must explain why the rebels would blame him.  Abarbanel implies that these points were emphasized during the division of the camp, when Yosef clearly received two portions (Ephraim and Menashe each had their own encampment) and Yehuda was chosen to travel first. This might have led the people to believe that Moshe was involved in the decision. Ibn Ezra adds that maybe they suspected Moshe of favoritism, as his loyal servant, Yehoshua, was also from the tribe of Yosef.</fn></li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>When did the rebellion take place?</b> According to Ibn Ezra, our story is not found in its chronological place, and actually occurred earlier, right after the Levites were chosen to replace the firstborns in the aftermath of the Sin of the Golden Calf.<fn>See here v. 28 and Ibn Ezra Shemot 32:29 that the firstborns had been the ones actively sacrificing to the Calf (as they were the ones in charge of sacrificial service until that point), making them most culpable.  As the Levites did not participate, they were chosen in their stead. See <a href="Selection of the Priests and Levites" data-aht="page">Selection of the Priests and Levites</a> for elaboration and dissenting views regarding the switch.</fn>  This switch led to much resentment,<fn>Considering that, according to Ibn Ezra (see his comments on 16:28 here), many of the firstborns were killed at the hands of the Levites during the incident, there was probably much enmity between the two groups.</fn> especially on the part of the firstborns, and as such, it was they who made up the bulk of the rebels. Ibn Ezra does not explain why the rebellion is discussed here and not when it occurred.</point> | <point><b>When did the rebellion take place?</b> According to Ibn Ezra, our story is not found in its chronological place, and actually occurred earlier, right after the Levites were chosen to replace the firstborns in the aftermath of the Sin of the Golden Calf.<fn>See here v. 28 and Ibn Ezra Shemot 32:29 that the firstborns had been the ones actively sacrificing to the Calf (as they were the ones in charge of sacrificial service until that point), making them most culpable.  As the Levites did not participate, they were chosen in their stead. See <a href="Selection of the Priests and Levites" data-aht="page">Selection of the Priests and Levites</a> for elaboration and dissenting views regarding the switch.</fn>  This switch led to much resentment,<fn>Considering that, according to Ibn Ezra (see his comments on 16:28 here), many of the firstborns were killed at the hands of the Levites during the incident, there was probably much enmity between the two groups.</fn> especially on the part of the firstborns, and as such, it was they who made up the bulk of the rebels. Ibn Ezra does not explain why the rebellion is discussed here and not when it occurred.</point> | ||
Line 76: | Line 76: | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
<li><b>Firstborns</b> – Ibn Ezra, Ramban, Chizkuni and Abarbanel assume that the 250 men were composed mainly of firstborns who protested the selection of the Levites and their being ousted from cultic service.</li> | <li><b>Firstborns</b> – Ibn Ezra, Ramban, Chizkuni and Abarbanel assume that the 250 men were composed mainly of firstborns who protested the selection of the Levites and their being ousted from cultic service.</li> | ||
− | <li><b>Noble Israelites</b> – Hoil Moshe, in contrast, assume that the 250 men were noblemen from throughout Israel, who questioned the monopoly on sacrificial service held by both the priests and tribe of Levi as a whole. They wished to return to the state which existed before the Sin of the Golden Calf, when all could partake in the service.<fn>See Hoil Moshe Shemot 20:20, Bemidbar 1:2 and his opinion in <a href="Altars of Earth, Stone, and Wood" data-aht="page">Altars of Earth, Stone, and Wood</a>.</fn> Netziv even presents them as holy men, with noble and sincere, though misguided, motives.<fn>According to Netziv, these people were not actually attempting to effect a change of policy and recognized that the priesthood was to remain in the hands of the tribe of Levi. However, they burned with a desire to get closer to Hashem through active sacrificial service, even at the pain of death. [Cf. Netziv's reading of the episode of <i>ma'apilim</i> whom he also depicts as acting out of noble motives, cognizant that their actions might nonetheless be fatal.]</fn></li> | + | <li><b>Noble Israelites</b> – Hoil Moshe, in contrast, assume that the 250 men were noblemen from throughout Israel, who questioned the monopoly on sacrificial service held by both the priests and tribe of Levi as a whole. They wished to return to the state which existed before the Sin of the Golden Calf, when all could partake in the service.<fn>See Hoil Moshe Shemot 20:20, Bemidbar 1:2 and his opinion in <a href="Altars of Earth, Stone, and Wood" data-aht="page">Altars of Earth, Stone, and Wood</a>.</fn> Netziv even presents them as holy men, with noble and sincere, though misguided, motives.<fn>According to Netziv, these people were not actually attempting to effect a change of policy and recognized that the priesthood was to remain in the hands of the tribe of Levi. However, they burned with a desire to get closer to Hashem through active sacrificial service, even at the pain of death. [Cf. Netziv's reading of the episode of the <i>ma'apilim</i> whom he also depicts as acting out of noble motives, cognizant that their actions might nonetheless be fatal.]</fn></li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>Conflicting grievances</b> – One of the difficulties with Ibn Ezra's reconstruction is that according to him, the various rebels had conflicting interests, for both the firstborns (who resented the Levites) and the Levites themselves were among the rebels.<fn>As the other commentators do not have the Levites (excluding Korach) play a significant role in the rebellion (or do not single out the firstborns), this is not a problem for them.</fn></point> | <point><b>Conflicting grievances</b> – One of the difficulties with Ibn Ezra's reconstruction is that according to him, the various rebels had conflicting interests, for both the firstborns (who resented the Levites) and the Levites themselves were among the rebels.<fn>As the other commentators do not have the Levites (excluding Korach) play a significant role in the rebellion (or do not single out the firstborns), this is not a problem for them.</fn></point> | ||
Line 91: | Line 91: | ||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>" בְּזֹאת תֵּדְעוּן כִּי י״י שְׁלָחַנִי לַעֲשׂוֹת אֵת כׇּל הַמַּעֲשִׂים הָאֵלֶּה "</b> – Ibn Ezra claims that Moshe is speaking, not of his entire mission, but only of the switching of the firstborns and Levites.<fn>Abarbanel, instead, claims that Moshe is speaking of each of the three issues being contested - the choice of Aharon, the selection of tribe of Levi, and the tribal status of Yehuda and Yosef (vs. Reuven).</fn></point> | <point><b>" בְּזֹאת תֵּדְעוּן כִּי י״י שְׁלָחַנִי לַעֲשׂוֹת אֵת כׇּל הַמַּעֲשִׂים הָאֵלֶּה "</b> – Ibn Ezra claims that Moshe is speaking, not of his entire mission, but only of the switching of the firstborns and Levites.<fn>Abarbanel, instead, claims that Moshe is speaking of each of the three issues being contested - the choice of Aharon, the selection of tribe of Levi, and the tribal status of Yehuda and Yosef (vs. Reuven).</fn></point> | ||
− | <point><b>Different punishments</b> – The various groups received different punishments, since they erred in different ways.  Those who rebelled about cultic issues (the choice of Aharon and the Levites) were punished by fire, while those who rebelled against Moshe's leadership were swallowed by the earth.<fn>The verses are somewhat ambiguous regarding the fate of Korach himself. From Bemidbar 16:27 and 26:10, it sounds as if he shared the fate of Datan and Aviram.  On the other hand, Devarim 11:6 mentions only Datan and Aviram as perishing in the earth, omitting Korach.  [See also Bemidbar 16:27 which similarly has only Datan and Aviram emerging from their tents, and 16:27 which mentions Korach's possessions being swallowed, but not Korach himself.]  Ibn Ezra, Abarbanel, and Hoil Moshe all attempt to prove that Korach was burned together with the 250 men. As he, like they, protested on cultic grounds, it is logical that they all were punished in the same manner. See, though, the opinion in Bavli Sanhedrin 110a, which suggests that Korach received a dual punishment, being both burned and swallowed. This possibility, too, would make sense according to this approach which presents Korach as being the ringleader who united both groups of rebels.</fn></point> | + | <point><b>Different punishments</b> – The various groups received different punishments, since they erred in different ways.  Those who rebelled about cultic issues (the choice of Aharon and the Levites) were punished by fire, while those who rebelled against Moshe's leadership were swallowed by the earth.<fn>The verses are somewhat ambiguous regarding the fate of Korach himself. From Bemidbar 16:27 and <a href="Bemidbar26-9-10" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 26:10</a>, it sounds as if he shared the fate of Datan and Aviram.  On the other hand, <a href="Devarim11-6" data-aht="source">Devarim 11:6</a> mentions only Datan and Aviram as perishing in the earth, omitting Korach.  [See also Bemidbar 16:27 which similarly has only Datan and Aviram emerging from their tents, and 16:27 which mentions Korach's possessions being swallowed, but not Korach himself.]  Ibn Ezra, Abarbanel, and Hoil Moshe all attempt to prove that Korach was burned together with the 250 men. As he, like they, protested on cultic grounds, it is logical that they all were punished in the same manner. See, though, the opinion in<multilink><a href="BavliSanhedrin110a" data-aht="source"> Bavli Sanhedrin 110a</a><a href="BavliSanhedrin110a" data-aht="source">Sanhedrin 110a</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>, which suggests that Korach received a dual punishment, being both burned and swallowed. This possibility, too, would make sense according to this approach which presents Korach as being the ringleader who united both groups of rebels.</fn></point> |
<point><b>Test of the staffs</b> – These sources disagree regarding the goal of the test:<br/> | <point><b>Test of the staffs</b> – These sources disagree regarding the goal of the test:<br/> | ||
<ul> | <ul> |
Version as of 11:53, 27 June 2019
Korach's Rebellion
Exegetical Approaches
Against Aharon
The whole rebellion revolved around one main issue, the choice of Aharon as priest.
- Levites – R. Chananel maintains that the 250 people were all from the tribe of Levi.7 They, like Korach, were not satisfied with "serving the priests" and aspired to be priests themselves.
- Reubenites – According to Rashi, the men were mainly from the tribe of Reuven. Rashi suggests that their joining the rebellion was a technical result of their living close to and being swayed by Korach, but it is possible that the tribe as a whole felt that they deserved priestly status due to their ancestor's being the firstborn to Yaakov (see R"Y Bekhor Shor above).
- All of Israel – Alternatively, it is possible that this group was comprised of people from all the tribes. This position might maintain that before the sin of the Calf and the building of the Tabernacle, every individual Israelite had been allowed to sacrifice on private altars, and the people were hoping to return to this status quo.8
According to this approach, Datan and Aviram are not really bothered by Moshe's leadership as a whole, only by (what they perceive as) his nepotism in choosing his brother. Their words "כִּי תִשְׂתָּרֵר עָלֵינוּ גַּם הִשְׂתָּרֵר" are an accusation that Moshe is abusing his power for self-interest.11
- Moshe might have been hoping to weaken the coalition, trying to influence individual members to change course. Thus, after (unsuccessfully) trying to convince the Levites that they had no good cause for rebelling, he turned to sway Datan and Aviram, but they refused to come before him.
- According to R"Y Bekhor Shor, though Datan and Aviram agreed with Korach's challenging of Aharon, they opposed the proposed incense test.13 Moshe, thus, called them to personally invite them to join the larger assembly in the contest. The brothers refused, claiming that they did not need a test to prove who was in the right.
- The directives regarding guarding the Mishkan and not coming close might be repeated here since the rebellion proved that previous warnings had not been sufficient.
- Perhaps, Hashem first introduces the law that the priests (and Levites) are not to inherit here, to highlight to the rebelling nation, that priesthood comes not only with privileges, but also with costs.
Against Aharon and Moshe
The rebellion had two focal points. Korach and his 250 followers objected to Aharon's priesthood, while Datan and Aviram challenged Moshe's leadership.
- Two complaints – The arguments of Korach and the 250 men and the complaints of Datan and Aviram are totally distinct, one focusing on the cultic realm and one on political issues.
- Two attitudes to Moshe – While Korach and the 250 princes recognize Moshe's authority and heed his words, Datan and Aviram do not.21
- Two locales – Physically, the two groups are located in different places. The fact that Moshe must send for Datan and Aviram (v. 12) implies that they were separate from the other rebels.22
- Two tests / punishments – The two groups are proven wrong and meet their deaths in different ways. While the 250 princes are burned by Divine fire, Datan and Aviram are swallowed by the earth.
Against Aharon, Moshe and the Tribe of Levi
The rebellion was multi-faceted, with groups complaining about both spiritual and political status. Some protested the priestly class, others challenged the choice of the Levites, while yet others had issue with Moshe.
- Challenging Aharon and the priesthood – Most of these sources assume that Korach was jealous of and desired Aharon's position. Ibn Ezra adds that the Levites as a whole might have resented having to serve the priests. According to Netziv and Hoil Moshe, in contrast, it was the lay Israelites who wished to be priests.31
- Protesting the selection of the Levites – Ibn Ezra, Ramban, Chizkuni and Abarbanel present this complaint as emanating mainly from the firstborns32 who had originally played a role in the cultic service33 but were then displaced by the Levites,34 while the Netziv and Hoil Moshe, in contrast, claim that the Israelites at large were bothered by the monopoly of the tribe.
- Challenging Moshe - According to Ramban and Hoil Moshe, Datan and Aviram challenged Moshe's overall leadership, blaming him for taking them to die in the Wilderness.35 According to Ibn Ezra and Abarbanel, in contrast, they36 were upset about their tribe losing its firstborn status to Yosef as regards inheritance, and to Yehuda as regards leadership.37
- Firstborns – Ibn Ezra, Ramban, Chizkuni and Abarbanel assume that the 250 men were composed mainly of firstborns who protested the selection of the Levites and their being ousted from cultic service.
- Noble Israelites – Hoil Moshe, in contrast, assume that the 250 men were noblemen from throughout Israel, who questioned the monopoly on sacrificial service held by both the priests and tribe of Levi as a whole. They wished to return to the state which existed before the Sin of the Golden Calf, when all could partake in the service.42 Netziv even presents them as holy men, with noble and sincere, though misguided, motives.43
- Ibn Ezra posits that the brothers had offered a sacrifice at some point prior to our story and Moshe prays that it not be accepted by Hashem in light of their actions.
- Hoil Moshe, in contrast, suggests a "תיקון סופרים", that the phrase be read as if written, "לא אפן אל מנחתם". Moshe's words are not a prayer that the rebels' sacrifices not be accepted, but a claim of Moshe's own innocence, parallel to his following statement, "לֹא חֲמוֹר אֶחָד מֵהֶם נָשָׂאתִי".
- Selection of Priests and Levites – According to Ibn Ezra and Abarbanel the nation was not convinced by the incense test, blaming Moshe for telling the nation to bring a fatal foreign fire (or otherwise causing the people's deaths). As such, a new test was needed to prove the worthiness of both Aharon and the Levites.
- Selection of the tribe of Levi – Alternatively, Hoil Moshe suggests that the incense test sufficed to convince the nation of Aharon's worthiness, as he alone survived, proving that he was the only one worthy of bringing incense. However, the people still had doubts regarding the selection of the tribe of Levi as a whole.55 Since the bringing of incense was a rite reserved for priests, it shed no light on who was worthy of Levitical service and a new test was needed.